Vicki Vale was shrieking damsel in distress character. Chase Meridian was a laughable caricature who was supposed to be a professional shrink who throws herself at Batman on the roof of Police HQ.[

If you consider these better written characters then your standards are so low they're practically sitting in hell

Oh, c'mon, she was like I'll slap you in the face because I'm your moral compass and your inspiration to become a better man. That was her only purpose in the movie. She wasn't a character, she was a plot device.

Quote:

Let me get this straight: You're saying you wanted Catwoman portrayed with no costume, no Selina Kyle name, and just some pretty thief who robs rich old ladies?

No, but that could've been used for her introduction instead of what we got. Her making Bruce Wayne look like a cripple and an idiot.

Quote:

Are you as Crazy as Harvey Kent? How does an inanimate object like a coin hold the blame for what Maroni did lol?

Maybe you should actually read the comic. It's on the pirate bay somewhere. I read it a long time ago and can't be bothered looking for it again.

Quote:

No, it wasn't. It was written as a Joker movie guest starring Batman. That was one of the common complaints about the movie. That Burton was clearly more interested in the Joker than Batman.

That's because Batman is a character that likes to hide in the shadows in Tim Burton's movies. Perfect contrast to the Joker. Burton even says so in the commentary on Batman.

Quote:

How does that make them two sides of the same coin? Batman doesn't go around chasing random women he sees in a photo.

Bruce is going after Vicki. Joker is going after Vicki. "Nice apartment you got here. Lots of space." - Said by both Bruce Wayne and Joker to Vicki.

Maroni: "Take it up with the Joker. He killed your woman. He made you like this"

Dent: "The Joker chose ME!"

Gordon: "The Joker took the best of us and tore him down"

Take the hint, OutRiddled.

OutRiddled, I am thinking at this stage you're either trying to pull my leg here, or you're not the sharpest knife in the drawer (no offense).

The Joker was feeding Harvey a load of bull to bend his mind even further. This is what he was gloating about to Batman later. "I took Gotham's white knight and I brought him down to our level. It wasn't hard. Madness as you know is like gravity. All it takes is a little push".

You're also ignoring the fact that he eventually said to Harvey "When I say that you and your girlfriend was nothing personal....you know that I'm telling the truth".

It wasn't made so clear. Like I'm supposed to believe that the Joker made all of these elaborate plans. It's not even made clear that he took over the entire mob. "Tell your men they work for me now" is all we get. Joker in '89 killed Grissom, and all of the other mob leaders. I tend to believe that Joker is as he says "just a mad dog chasing cars", because I find it hard to believe he was able to execute all of these plans with full co-operation by the mob (especially as Maroni was still alive at that point).

OutRiddled, I know this is between you and The Joker here, but I'd walk away if I was debating you here. There's nothing more to say if you don't accept that the mob "turned to a man that they didn't understand". Even Maroni has regrets about what happened to Dent. They gave Joker the means to pull everything off because they were getting desperate. They brought him in to take down Batman, and Joker went off the rails. It's really that simple. Whether you're happy with how that was presented is another thing entirely, but that absolutely was the situation in the movie. You can't change the facts to support your opinion.

There's nothing wrong with preferring Nicholson, but your attempt to explain "objectively" why his was a better version of the character has been one huge fail.

And, about him taking over the mob, we see it in part and the rest it's not hard to figure out. We see him kill Gambol, have men cut up Chenchen and feed him to his dogs, and even had Maroni running with the rest of the city by the end. Do you really think that your mob thugs will going to say no to this guy?

Oh, c'mon, she was like I'll slap you in the face because I'm your moral compass and your inspiration to become a better man. That was her only purpose in the movie. She wasn't a character, she was a plot device.

What would you do if your best friend revealed to you he intended to murder someone? I'd give him a slap, too.

Vicki Vale, that's a plot device. She ticks every cliche in the book. Meets the hero for the first time. Fall in love with the hero after one night in the sack. Target of the villain. Damsel in distress at every turn, complete with the annoying screaming like a banshee.

Rachel broke the stereotype. She knew the hero since childhood. They didn't share any romantic moments in the movie until the end. Their connection and relationship was one based on years of friendship, not a one night roll in the hay. Because she was an honest D.A. in a very corrupt city, she became a natural target for the criminals, not just the hero's girl who is grabbed for the sake of being rescued.

Quote:

No, but that could've been used for her introduction instead of what we got. Her making Bruce Wayne look like a cripple and an idiot.

Bruce Wayne WAS a cripple. He was hobbling around on a cane because he had no cartilage in his knees.

Quote:

Maybe you should actually read the comic. It's on the pirate bay somewhere. I read it a long time ago and can't be bothered looking for it again.

I have read the comic. I own it. Is there any particular page you want me to scan because none of it is going to help your case lol.

Quote:

That's because Batman is a character that likes to hide in the shadows in Tim Burton's movies. Perfect contrast to the Joker. Burton even says so in the commentary on Batman.

That doesn't make it a good characterization. Batman is supposed to be the main character. This is his first movie. He should have been front and center of the story.

Quote:

Bruce is going after Vicki. Joker is going after Vicki. "Nice apartment you got here. Lots of space." - Said by both Bruce Wayne and Joker to Vicki.

Again how does this make them the same? Dent and Bruce both loved Rachel. That didn't make them the same.

You're clutching at straws. The only thing Batman and Joker shared in Batman '89 was the horrible contrived connection of creating each other.

Quote:

It wasn't made so clear.

Only if you ignore the plethora of quotes I posted which TELL you in plain simple terms.

Quote:

Like I'm supposed to believe that the Joker made all of these elaborate plans.

You're watching a movie about a guy who dresses like a giant bat. Elaborate plans are a drop in the ocean compared to that.

Quote:

It's not even made clear that he took over the entire mob. "Tell your men they work for me now" is all we get.

That's all you need. You forgot to add the "This is MY city" quote, too. That makes it very clear.

Quote:

Joker in '89 killed Grissom, and all of the other mob leaders. I tend to believe that Joker is as he says "just a mad dog chasing cars", because I find it hard to believe he was able to execute all of these plans with full co-operation by the mob (especially as Maroni was still alive at that point).

It doesn't matter what you want to believe. You've been making things up and missing the obvious consistently since we started this discussion. You're ignoring what the movie tells and shows you. Meaning you're being ignorant for no reason.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BatLobsterRises

OutRiddled, I know this is between you and The Joker here, but I'd walk away if I was debating you here. There's nothing more to say if you don't accept that the mob "turned to a man that they didn't understand". Even Maroni has regrets about what happened to Dent. They gave Joker the means to pull everything off because they were getting desperate. They brought him in to take down Batman, and Joker went off the rails. It's really that simple. Whether you're happy with how that was presented is another thing entirely, but that absolutely was the situation in the movie. You can't change the facts to support your opinion.

There's nothing wrong with preferring Nicholson, but your attempt to explain "objectively" why his was a better version of the character has been one huge fail.

Exactly

__________________
"Sometimes I remember it one way. Sometimes another. If I'm going to have a past, I prefer it to be multiple choice!"

OutRiddled, I know this is between you and The Joker here, but I'd walk away if I was debating you here. There's nothing more to say if you don't accept that the mob "turned to a man that they didn't understand". Even Maroni has regrets about what happened to Dent. They gave Joker the means to pull everything off because they were getting desperate. They brought him in to take down Batman, and Joker went off the rails. It's really that simple. Whether you're happy with how that was presented is another thing entirely, but that absolutely was the situation in the movie. You can't change the facts to support your opinion.

There's nothing wrong with preferring Nicholson, but your attempt to explain "objectively" why his was a better version of the character has been one huge fail.

This isn't debate, it's discussion. There is no "fail". Am I talking to 11 year olds here? Am I going to be PWNED OMG LOL!!!!!1111111

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gotham's Knight

And, about him taking over the mob, we see it in part and the rest it's not hard to figure out. We see him kill Gambol, have men cut up Chenchen and feed him to his dogs, and even had Maroni running with the rest of the city by the end. Do you really think that your mob thugs will going to say no to this guy?

I know what was going on. It's just that I don't agree with it. Nolan relies too heavily on exposition to tell a story. In Batman '89, the whole thing with the mob wasn't drawn out for most of the movie. Joker killed Grissom, then took out the other mob guys that were against him. This happened in less than 15 minutes of the movie.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Joker

What would you do if your best friend revealed to you he intended to murder someone? I'd give him a slap, too.

That's not the point. I told you, obvious script device.

Quote:

Vicki Vale, that's a plot device. She ticks every cliche in the book. Meets the hero for the first time. Fall in love with the hero after one night in the sack. Target of the villain. Damsel in distress at every turn, complete with the annoying screaming like a banshee.

Vicki Vale was her own character, or at least more so than Rachel Dawes. We are discovering Bruce Wayne through her eyes. She is more than just a plot device. Plus I think Kim Basinger has way better acting talent.

Quote:

Rachel broke the stereotype. She knew the hero since childhood. They didn't share any romantic moments in the movie until the end. Their connection and relationship was one based on years of friendship, not a one night roll in the hay. Because she was an honest D.A. in a very corrupt city, she became a natural target for the criminals, not just the hero's girl who is grabbed for the sake of being rescued.

The romantic interest knowing the hero since childhood isn't knew - it was done in Forrest Gump. It's an obvious way to introduce a character arc.

Quote:

Bruce Wayne WAS a cripple. He was hobbling around on a cane because he had no cartilage in his knees.

I'm not talking about the story. That was obviously inspired by Catwoman's first appearance. She was wearing a disguise and being a thief. Batman figuring out her scheme, etc.

The difference is that Batman let her go deliberately. He wasn't made a fool of.

Quote:

I have read the comic. I own it. Is there any particular page you want me to scan because none of it is going to help your case lol.

This is all about you pointing out that he is blaming a coin for what happened to him.. I think you're reading too much into it.

Quote:

That doesn't make it a good characterization. Batman is supposed to be the main character. This is his first movie. He should have been front and center of the story.

That's the genius. Batman slowly emerges through the story. He isn't front and centre all the time, so as to not ruin the mystery like Nolan did.

Quote:

Again how does this make them the same? Dent and Bruce both loved Rachel. That didn't make them the same.

You're clutching at straws. The only thing Batman and Joker shared in Batman '89 was the horrible contrived connection of creating each other.

And you say that I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer or just pulling your leg.

It was being hinted at through the whole movie. You just weren't paying attention.

Quote:

Only if you ignore the plethora of quotes I posted which TELL you in plain simple terms.

You're watching a movie about a guy who dresses like a giant bat. Elaborate plans are a drop in the ocean compared to that.

That's all you need. You forgot to add the "This is MY city" quote, too. That makes it very clear.

It doesn't matter what you want to believe. You've been making things up and missing the obvious consistently since we started this discussion. You're ignoring what the movie tells and shows you. Meaning you're being ignorant for no reason.

It's embarassing how much exposition I have to dig through, just to uncover a few plot points. Nolan's movies put me to sleep every time. A picture tells a thousand words, and you can process that much faster. Thank you Mr Nolan.

1. You make it sound like if it's dialogue, it's exposition.
2. You make it sound like all exposition is inherently a bad thing.

And you'd be wrong on both accounts. Alfred's wikipedia summary of Bane's history, now that's bad exposition, no two ways about it.

But the Ramirez quotes? They're exposition done with excellence. They're lines that aren't given a big a spotlight, they're peppered into a sequence that is about something else (Ramirez wondering why Batman doesn't show up, Harvey and Gordon arguing about Lau) and so you don't have time to stop and think about them. But if you're paying attention (which it sounds to me like you weren't) they're still in the back of your mind so that when the reveal that Ramirez is on the take comes, it doesn't feel like it came out of nowhere.

It is a bad thing when there are too many characters. They drop in hints like I'm supposed to care about a character that is barely on screen for 20 seconds. And she had no memorable moments or lines of dialogue to distinguish her from the rest.

That is the point. She was written like a real person, not a plot device.

Quote:

Vicki Vale was her own character, or at least more so than Rachel Dawes. We are discovering Bruce Wayne through her eyes. She is more than just a plot device. Plus I think Kim Basinger has way better acting talent.

That is the essence of a plot device lol. Using one character to simply "discover" another character, instead of doing it via good writing and exploring the actual character themselves.

Quote:

The romantic interest knowing the hero since childhood isn't knew - it was done in Forrest Gump. It's an obvious way to introduce a character arc.

I didn't say it was brand new. I said it wasn't a tired cliche like Vicki was. Characters like Vicki are a dime a dozen. The romantic interest coming from childhood is not.

Quote:

I'm not talking about the story. That was obviously inspired by Catwoman's first appearance. She was wearing a disguise and being a thief. Batman figuring out her scheme, etc.

The difference is that Batman let her go deliberately. He wasn't made a fool of.

Batman did not deliberately let her go! What movies do you be watching? He couldn't have stopped her. What did you expect him to do jump out the window after her?

Quote:

This is all about you pointing out that he is blaming a coin for what happened to him.. I think you're reading too much into it.

In what way? You're the one who brought up this scan. How does this flimsy weak non canon characterization support your argument?

Quote:

That's the genius. Batman slowly emerges through the story. He isn't front and centre all the time, so as to not ruin the mystery like Nolan did.

Batman is not supposed to be a mystery to the audience. He wasn't in the comics. He wasn't in the animated series. Why? Because he's a fully fleshed out 3 dimensional character who has lots of layers to explore. Layers Burton barely scratched the surface of because he was more interested in the showy misfit villains.

Quote:

And you say that I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer or just pulling your leg.

It was being hinted at through the whole movie. You just weren't paying attention

So you keep saying, yet you've been struggling to prove it.

So yes, you either are having a laugh or you're not very sharp. Again no offense.

This isn't debate, it's discussion. There is no "fail". Am I talking to 11 year olds here? Am I going to be PWNED OMG LOL!!!!!1111111

How is it not a debate? Once you're multi-quoting back and forth with opposing point of views, that's pretty much what we tend to call a debate here.

And, no I don't think think you're getting PWNED OMG, but once you started trying to deny that Joker plotted the Rachel/Harvey scenario I think you started digging a hole for yourself where you can either keep arguing based on your own misconceptions and misremembered plot points of the movie, or admit that you're wrong and climb out of the hole.

Batman did not deliberately let her go! What movies do you be watching? He couldn't have stopped her. What did you expect him to do jump out the window after her?

I was talking about in the comic.

Quote:

Batman is not supposed to be a mystery to the audience. He wasn't in the comics. He wasn't in the animated series. Why? Because he's a fully fleshed out 3 dimensional character who has lots of layers to explore. Layers Burton barely scratched the surface of because he was more interested in the showy misfit villains.

That's because each of the villains explore a part of Batman's psyche. Except like a mirror image. It's a complex psychological juxtaposition.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BatLobsterRises

How is it not a debate? Once you're multi-quoting back and forth with opposing point of views, that's pretty much what we tend to call a debate here.

And, no I don't think think you're getting PWNED OMG, but once you started trying to deny that Joker plotted the Rachel/Harvey scenario I think you started digging a hole for yourself where you can either keep arguing based on your own misconceptions and misremembered plot points of the movie, or admit that you're wrong and climb out of the hole.

I think you can do it man. Deshi deshi basara basara!

**** off. You don't get it. How many times do I have to explain. The numerous plotholes... Yeah, it's inferred, but I still cannot ignore the plotholes. Joker's insane level of detail mastermind plotting.

**** off. You don't get it. How many times do I have to explain. The numerous plotholes... Yeah, it's inferred, but I still cannot ignore the plotholes. Joker's insane level of detail mastermind plotting.

Then you're getting more into the plot mechanics in a discussion about characterization.

I can't really think of a good reason to justify how and when The Joker wired an entire hospital to explode, but ultimately I don't care because seeing The Joker walking out of a hospital in a nurse uniform as it blows up behind him is one of the most Jokery-things imaginable. The movie took a shortcut, but it's fun and terrifying to see what The Joker is able to accomplish without being given every little detail about how he worked it all out. It helps with his unpredictability factor, which is important to the character.

Then you're getting more into the plot mechanics in a discussion about characterization.

I can't really think of a good reason to justify how and when The Joker wired an entire hospital to explode, but ultimately I don't care because seeing The Joker walking out of a hospital in a nurse uniform as it blows up behind him is one of the most Jokery-things imaginable.

It is part of characterisation.. as the film is possibly asking me to see Joker as some mastermind planner down to the last detail. He can even time when to drive out a school bus at the exact second when a line of school buses are passing (and they somehow don't notice that one bus is driving out of a big hole at the front of the bank). And he times everything perfectly so Batman can arrive in the nick of time to save only Harvey Dent.

It is part of characterisation.. as the film is possibly asking me to see Joker as some mastermind planner down to the last detail. He can even time when to drive out a school bus at the exact second when a line of school buses are passing (and they somehow don't notice that one bus is driving out of a big hole at the front of the bank). And he times everything perfectly so Batman can arrive in the nick of time to save only Harvey Dent.

I still think Heath Ledger did have a lot of good moments though.

Fair enough I suppose. I just don't think it's un-Joker like for him to have that almost supernaturally brilliant criminal mind and a good sense of timing. Ledger was able to sell that to me in his performance, you always got the feel he was 10 steps ahead of everyone around him.

Fair enough I suppose. I just don't think it's un-Joker like for him to have that almost supernaturally brilliant criminal mind and a good sense of timing. Ledger was able to sell that to me in his performance, you always got the feel he was 10 steps ahead of everyone around him.

I see that as being more like Riddler than Joker. Nolan seems to have combined the two characters, which is why he couldn't use Riddler for TDKR. He had already done Riddler, with Joker the mastermind criminal always a step ahead of Batman.

I know what you were talking about. It was two difference scenarios. The comic Batman wasn't crippled on a cane.

Quote:

That's because each of the villains explore a part of Batman's psyche. Except like a mirror image. It's a complex psychological juxtaposition.

No, it's called lazy writing. You don't learn a thing about Bruce Wayne from watching the Joker.

Quote:

I see that as being more like Riddler than Joker. Nolan seems to have combined the two characters, which is why he couldn't use Riddler for TDKR. He had already done Riddler, with Joker the mastermind criminal always a step ahead of Batman.

Yeah all those riddles Joker sent Batman in TDK. Totally Riddler like. Joker is ALWAYS ahead of Batman. That's one reason why he's his greatest villain. Here I'll give you a very accessible example for you to check out yourself:

It's all about the first encounter Batman and Gotham have with the Joker, and Batman is completely overwhelmed by him, Joker is always one step ahead of Batman and the Cops, the city is thrown into chaos and fear of him, just like in TDK.

As Batman said in BTAS; "Normal criminals usually have logical motives. But the Joker's insane schemes make sense to him alone. That's why he's so unpredictable".

__________________
"Sometimes I remember it one way. Sometimes another. If I'm going to have a past, I prefer it to be multiple choice!"

I see that as being more like Riddler than Joker. Nolan seems to have combined the two characters, which is why he couldn't use Riddler for TDKR. He had already done Riddler, with Joker the mastermind criminal always a step ahead of Batman.

How was the Joker anything like the Riddler in Dark Knight?

I don't remember riddles, I don't remember him being OCD and trying to outwit Batman (he did that naturally and pretty easily). Don't remember The Joker being obsessed with puzzles and riddles and having a sense of a superiority complex?

Riddler robbed banks in clown gear to rile up the mob? Riddler put smiles on public officials he didn't like? Riddler went from wanting to kill Batman to wanting to be his play buddy that he could never kill? Riddler strapped bombs so Batman had to choose between the two for an emotional/moral dilemma? Was there a riddle or puzzle that I'm forgetting that the ferries had to solve in order to solve?

I don't see how he was the Joker, unless you're stuck on the mind games/situations had in the film. But I can assure you, a Riddler mind game/situation would be completely different with a different MO and motive.

The Riddler battles Batman and Gotham because he thinks he's better, smarter and superior. The Joker battles Batman because he's fun and everything he's not (other than a freak).

I don't remember riddles, I don't remember him being OCD and trying to outwit Batman (he did that naturally and pretty easily). Don't remember The Joker being obsessed with puzzles and riddles and having a sense of a superiority complex?

Riddler robbed banks in clown gear to rile up the mob? Riddler put smiles on public officials he didn't like? Riddler went from wanting to kill Batman to wanting to be his play buddy that he could never kill? Riddler strapped bombs so Batman had to choose between the two for an emotional/moral dilemma? Was there a riddle or puzzle that I'm forgetting that the ferries had to solve in order to solve?

I don't see how he was the Joker, unless you're stuck on the mind games/situations had in the film. But I can assure you, a Riddler mind game/situation would be completely different with a different MO and motive.

The Riddler battles Batman and Gotham because he thinks he's better, smarter and superior. The Joker battles Batman because he's fun and everything he's not (other than a freak).

Then you're getting more into the plot mechanics in a discussion about characterization.

I can't really think of a good reason to justify how and when The Joker wired an entire hospital to explode, but ultimately I don't care because seeing The Joker walking out of a hospital in a nurse uniform as it blows up behind him is one of the most Jokery-things imaginable. The movie took a shortcut, but it's fun and terrifying to see what The Joker is able to accomplish without being given every little detail about how he worked it all out. It helps with his unpredictability factor, which is important to the character.

Also things like the firetruck on fire, the "clapping" scene, (s)laughter is the best medicine etc. really showed perfectly Joker's dark sense of humor and taste for the theatrics.

Yes, of course! A perfect example, one of my favorite scenes in the film and possibly one of my favorite scenes ever I was maybe more talking about the smaller details, but it's true that the character's twisted sense of humor and mischief can be found everywhere in the film. I'm always surprised when I hear that apparently some people thought Joker lacked a bit of his trademark dark sense of humor in TDK?